Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Elam v. Monarch Life Insurance Co.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 8, 1991No. 90-1510Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWagner, Associate Judge
The majority reaches a reasonable conclusion on the first issue before the court, but one, which in my view, remains foreclosed to this panel by applicable precedents. See M.A.P. v. Ryan, 285 A.2d 310, 312 (D.C.1971).1 Acknowledging that a different result “might well be impelled,” at least under the cases decided prior to Kellogg v. Winchell, 51 App.D.C. 17, 273 F. 745 (1921),2 the majority concludes that the language in the fee clause in the subject contract created an equitable lien on any settlement recovered. It is with the majority’s determination that Kellogg effected a change in prior…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,138 in Re Brass Kettle Restaurant, Inc., Debtor, Laurence H. Kallen, as Trustee v. Ash, Anos, Freedman & LoganCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Kellogg v. WinchellDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1921
- Continental Casualty Co. v. KellyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Pink v. FarringtonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1937
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.